4.8 Article

Homologous NiO//Ni2P nanoarrays grown on nickel foams: a well matched electrode pair with high stability in overall water splitting

期刊

NANOSCALE
卷 9, 期 13, 页码 4409-4418

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c6nr07953a

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51622204, 51472014, 51438011]
  2. Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of China [201331]
  3. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-13-0032]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  5. National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talents [BX201600007]
  6. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M600894]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Homologous NiO, Ni3S2, and Ni2P nanoarrays were obtained by thermolysis, sulfuration, and phosphorization of the Ni(SO4)(0.3)OH1.4 belt-like precursors. The three types of porous nickel compound films grown on nickel foam with a thickness of similar to 8 mu m have been used as anodes and cathodes in a two-electrode setup for overall water splitting. The electrode pairing of NixMy//NixMy (M = O, S, and P) for electrocatalysis in order of superiority is as follows: NiO//Ni2P > Ni3S2//Ni2P > Ni2P//Ni2P > Ni3S2//Ni3S2 > NiO//Ni3S2 > wNiO//NiO. The other two sets of NixMy with different thicknesses of similar to 5 and similar to 11 mu m also follow the abovementioned order. The well matched electrode pair of NiOOER//Ni2PHER only needs 1.65 V, whereas NiO//NiO pair needs 1.84 V to afford the current of 10 mA cm(-2) in 1 mol L-1 of aqueous KOH solution. In particular, the current density retention of the NiO//Ni2P reached 92% after 120 hours of electrolysis at 1.70 V (NiO//NiO only maintains 72% after 30-hour electrolysis). The novelty of this study focuses on fabricating a well matched electrode pair to substantially enhance its electrochemical performance and durability, which would provide a new insight into developing non- noble, highly efficient, and stable electrode pairs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据